Trump Advisors want regime change in Iran - Is this a joke?

War with Iran?  Is Trump Seriously Considering This?

The recent news from a Politico article that some of President Trump's foreign policy advisors want regime change in Iran has got to be troubling news.  Has the president not been following the long and unfruitful wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Those wars were supposed to show the strength of the US military and the "power of Ameria" to transform those nation-states into Western-style democracies in short time period.  The war in Afghanistan is a never-ending back and forth between the Taliban and ISIS (rumored) and Coalition forces fighting over the same space and cities.  I don't see anything getting better in that country.  

War with Iran would engulf (no pun intended) the Persian Gulf and the Greater Middle East, and this horrible military endeavor will not end well and will plunge the area into total conflict for many, many years.  I believe it will damage our military and the lasting effects will be irreparable, for Iran, the United States, Israel and neighboring countries.

President Trump may feel that in order to prove that he is no puppet of Putin, he will have to attack and defeat Iran and Syria, two client states of Russia.  He seems to have no understanding of how a government works, and what it can do, or what it can't.  If he cannot grasp that, how on earth do people think he can hold onto the prospects of war and its effects?  Syria is going to be a continued quagmire, with Russian, American and now recently exposed Israeli contributions to both sides of the fighting.  Israel wants President Bashar Assad out of power, which will eliminate a source of concern and one less enemy for the State of Israel.  However, Assad is a loyal client of Russia, and Russia has to show that it too will defend its friends, the same way America has to defend Europe and its allies in the Pacific region (Australia, the Philippines, Singapore and Japan).

Knowing this, why would President Trump want to start a fight with another client state of Russia, which will most likely draw in Putin himself. The danger is that this will constitute the first time great powers went to war with each other since World War II.  It will change the power dynamic and could force a nuclear exchange with Putin.  President Trump does not have the mental fortitude to avoid this type of catastrophe.  Iran will engage Israel through his proxies in the region including Hezbollah.  This will force Israel to engage Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which is the most powerful faction within the Iranian government, outside of the Mullahs.  America will have to defend Israel when Iranian and Russian forces retaliate.  I don't see how this conflict doesn't end without some sort of nuclear exchange of tactical nuclear weapons (nuclear bombs with a lower tonnage yield that destroys a smaller area of square mileage) with the Russians.

President Trump's advisors who are pushing this war narrative are, in my opinion, Steve Miller and Steve Bannon, two ultra-nationalists who see war as the only means to change the current state of the world.  Both of these nuts have no problem starting an unnecessary war that will provide no serious benefit to the country at large, or Western civilization.  Who in the Trump White House can challenge the two Steves?  Jared Kushner? Ivanka?  I am not so sure, especially with all the mysterious and troubling people that Trump keeps around, like Dr. Sebastian Gorka, who is a cheerleader for military solutions to almost every foreign policy issue.

I don't want to sound pessimistic, but if President Trump wants war with Iran, I don't see any counter force within the White House to turn him away from this terrible idea.  Jared and Ivanka don't have the influence to overrule President Trump if his ego and pride are on the line if the only solution for the praise he covets is to send America's men and women in the service of their country to another long war with ambiguous successes.  This callous endeavor will spell the end of our military readiness, our ability to deal with difficult situations with military solutions, and the benefit for our overall economy and the American people.  This war will not end well and could lead to horrible consequences for the future of the human race and democracy in the United States.

It is a scary time indeed for all of us on planet earth.

AK

Comey Don't Play That

Former FBI Director Comey and his testimony to Congressional Intelligence Committees

June 8, 2017

James Comey, the recently fired Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation gave, from most accounts, a riveting dose of testimony regarding his conversations with President Trump investigations.  It revolved around the multiple investigations of Trump campaign staffers, and the campaign itself, interactions and alleged collusion with Vladimir Putin's government.  President Trump has been very adamant in getting Mr. Comey to provide proof to the American public that he is not under investigation.  Although in the letter President Trump wrote to fire James Comey, he wrote that Mr. Comey conveyed to him that (three times!) that Mr. Trump was not under investigation.  That did nothing to stifle assumptions, rumors, and gossip amongst the political class in Washington, D.C. watching the hearings on televisions throughout the District.

After watching the hearings, and listening to both liberal and conservative viewpoints on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, I have come to the sad realization that Comey and his testimony are the "No Man's Land" of the trench warfare that Democrats and Republicans are fighting over.  Both groups take away from his testimony what they want to hear, and get their party machinery to repeat over and over.  Democrats continue to shill for the idea that Donald Trump worked with the Russian government to subvert the democratic process to choose an American president.  The Republicans, who control all three branches of power in America, carefully parse Comey's testimony to see if they can avoid any difficult discussions about Trump's culpability.  Congressman Darrel Issa feels that the "non-issue" has been put to rest (he is referring of course, to additional and broad-reaching investigations into the Trump Administration's Russia issue).  The Democrats, to no one's surprise, want to investigate everyone and anyone associated with the Trump Administration.

Comey is just another pawn in this constant war of politics between two out-of-touch political parties. Neither the Republican party or the Democratic party have shown any real desire to work on behalf of the people who pay taxes (they do, but those are bipartisan mega-donors, who provide the lion's share of campaign cash), and those voters have watched certain industries (Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, etc) do well, and see successful people do even better while the majority of the country has stagnated wages and many lose their jobs.

President Trump was supposed to be a sacrificial ham sandwich for Hillary Clinton to break the Glass Ceiling.  Instead, he used his savvy ability to listen to and argue for the mood of the rejected American voter, who is financially in trouble.  As a result of his shocking win, Democrats are trying to exercise their anger into proving the Trump Administration is guilty of collusion with a foreign power.  I am not defending Trump per se from any alleged act or accusation. I truly feel that a thorough investigation of the election, the hacking of the DNC, and interactions between Trump campaign staffers and the Russian government needs to be researched and presented to Congress and the American people.  Comey's experience should be part of this investigation, but sadly nothing will come of it.  Because the Republicans and Democrats and constantly using people and events to fight over control of the government, mainly to reward those aforementioned mega-donors, and their friends, there will be no great lesson learned from the 2016 election.

James Comey is a decent and dedicated public servant, whose testimony should be used to improve the methods Americans use to choose their elected officials to administer their country.  The sad part, Mr. Comey's testimony to Congress will be dissected and disseminated to the various echo chambers of the Republican and Democratic parties.  It will not be taken for what it is, a public servant's observations about a troubled year in American history regarding our elections, and how to correct mistakes and errors in cyber security.  It is another nail in the war between to extreme political ideologies, and which will eventually help the true enemy of our country, Vladimir Putin.  No wonder he smiles so often.

AK

Kathy Griffin Controversy, aka "Trump Head"

How Far Does Too Far Go?

How does the Kathy Griffin controversy stack up with other previous 1st Amendment issues concerning the President of the United States? During the Obama presidency, there were countless images of Obama in the Joker makeup, and other images of him with a bone through his nose, similar to the horrible stereotypical images of African tribespeople that racists used to show to the masses. Although I do not recall them, I think there might have been images of 'President Obama in cross-hairs, which is equally uncalled for.  Is the recent image of Kathy Griffin and the severed Donald Trump head the worst case of comics trying to get a reaction out of a shocked society?

I think Griffin's was the worst stunt that I can remember.   I know the 1st Amendment is a sacred law and right that Americans use, but I think in a divided society, with a polarizing President Trump, that image that Kathy Griffin released was both ill-advised and dumb.  It encourages similar behavior from others and will lead down a path that is unforgivable.  I know some comedians suggest that is what they do, to provoke, agitate and whip people into a frenzy.  That is fine and all, but in this day and age, it is not the kind of discussion the American people need to engage in.  

I think it started with the election/Supreme Court affirmation of the presidency of George W. Bush that started the trend of the unhinged behavior of the American electorate to publicly demean and insult the occupant of the White House through words and images that are shocking to many (I know presidents since the creation of the country and constitution have been subject to cartoon images and added ridicule, but lately it has gotten to be alarming).  Democrats and liberals started to goad each other into creating the perception of how stupid President Bush was, which led to the Will Ferrel role of a dim-witted chief executive who was in over his head and had Vice President Cheney the one who ran the country.

Then, when Barack Obama was elected to the White House, it was conservatives turn to raise the shock value of their lack of respect for the president and his family.  The media did not try to show how this type of behavior was not acceptable, rather the media showed these images to rile up the respective sides of the political divide.  It led to abhorrent behavior from some members of the Republican party, including consultants and party leaders, especially on the state and local level in conservative states.  The GOP should have taken the steps to clamp down and show of force that this derogatory behavior will never be tolerated.

For future generations, I hope that the American people will realize that one does not have to like or can even hate the President of the United States. They can make fun of him or her in a clever way, but that promoting behavior that pokes fun at, or at its worst encourages violence of any sort directed at a member of Congress or a President, is unacceptable and should never rear its ugly head again.

Jared Kushner and Rasputin...Can you make a fair comparison?

Much has been made by Trump regarding the special gifts and intellectual power of his son-in-law Jared Kushner. His White House portfolio is staggering, something HBO comedian John Oliver has said, even the smartest person on earth will find difficult. This includes "modernizing government," and delivering peace in the Middle East. It borders on absurd the power that someone who has no real qualifications to advise the Leader of the Free World on issues that will affect US citizens abroad and Americans here. How did someone so lacking in intellectual heft (see Kushner's admission to Harvard) get so close to the President of the United States, in terms of professional influence?

Jared Kushner was by all accounts a mediocre student at The Frisch School in Paramus, New Jersey, which was a school for Jewish students, a parochial institution similar to Catholic schools in New York, New Jersey, and surrounding areas. Mr. Kushner was academic, but not a stellar student. He was the scion of a wealthy and powerful real estate family in New Jersey, and whose father Charles, founded the Kushner Companies, in 1985. After Jared entered and graduated from Harvard (2003), Charles Kushner pleaded guilty in 2004 to tax violations, illegal campaign donations, and retaliating against a witness. The US Attorney who prosecuted and convicted the elder Kushner was none other than current New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

Because of this, the portly governor was slowly removed from the Trump campaign because of the sway and influence of the younger Kushner, Jared. This despite Christie being an effective bundler for Trump's fundraising in the tri-state area and other parts of the country. It was Kushner's revenge of sorts and showed the enormous amounts of influence he wields within President Trump's orbit.

Grigori Rasputin was a legendary and controversial figure during the reign of Tsar Nicholas II and Imperial Russia at the end of the 19th Century, and just before the 1917 October Revolution. He began his life as an unassuming poor wanderer who became deeply religious and cultivated a large following amongst the Russian Orthodox Church and its congregants. This led to some friction and eventually major conflict with opposition to the Tsar and other influential people within the church. Rasputin was believed by many to be a charlatan and a con man. However, Rasputin was eventually able to meet Tsar Nicholas II and become his advisor, and unofficial "healer" for his hemophiliac son Alexei. His influence was so resented by rivals, and some Russians in general, that I believe that he was "allowed" access to Nicholas II in the hopes that his influence would cause his own demise. When the Tsar left St. Petersburg to oversee Russian troops during World War I, Rasputin and Nicholas's wife Alexandra were left to run Russia. As Russian troops took massive losses during the war, Rasputin and his influence waned, and his unpopularity allowed conservative noblemen to arrange his assassination.

Rasputin and Jared Kushner share similarities in that both were not too spectacular in their intellectual capacities. Rather, they were able to gain access to power through proximity: Rasputin through religious sermons and his followers, Kushner through his marriage to Ivanka Trump, and her dad's successful campaign to win the White House.

What makes anyone believe that Jared has what it takes to successfully achieve what he has been assigned by President Trump? From his time at Harvard to his time working for the Kushner Companies, he has not shined at anything yet he has a seat at the table of power and access to influential political leaders around the globe. No one has ever heard him speak, or make a case as to why he advises the president to approve certain methods of governing. He seems to always be standing next to President Trump when he signs Executive Orders and with meetings with heads of state or ambassadors, but it seems weird the never speaks to anyone. Most senior staff in White House administrations at one point or another make the trek to meet on Sunday news shows or cable commentators. Kushner has done no such thing. How does someone like that have immense access and influence to a very powerful elected official?

Rasputin was similar in that he was able to parlay his religious sermons into access to the rich and powerful and eventually meeting the leader of his country. Tsar Nicholas II of the late 19th century to early 20th century is one thing, but the President of the United States during a 21st century with nuclear weapons is an entirely different parameter. It fills me with trepidation that someone who lacks qualifications in the areas of his diverse portfolio can effectively deliver on his assignments.

The year 2017 is a pivotal time in world history. The United States has had 80 years in which it has set the standard for free market capitalism and a foreign policy that protects Western-style democracies with military superiority. In this age, will someone who lacks the perspective and experience in the way Jared Kushner has, have the proper virtues to steer the Trump presidency off the ledge? His efforts will shape who controls the 21st Century in terms of dominance and influence. Because of his light resume, and growing up in privilege, I don't see him having the power he wants. The other elements of the White House brain trust (Steve Bannon, Steve Miller) will shape the direction of the country for the next four years, because of the greater influence of President Trump. Bannon and Miller share views that together are the polar opposite of Kushner, such as globalization is good, etc, and I feel will play better in the mind of President Trump.

All this is a lesson that who you know may benefit a specific person, but the greater good, for either a company or a country, will be negatively impacted by such poor peerage, and lack of meritocracy.